University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
J Sport Rehabil. 2011 May;20(2):187-97. doi: 10.1123/jsr.20.2.187.
Iontophoresis is a method of administering medications transcutaneously using galvanic current. Dose is the product of current amplitude and treatment duration. It is assumed that higher doses of iontophoresis are more effective in delivering medication, yet research supporting this claim is insufficient.
To compare high-dose lidocaine iontophoresis (80 mA-min), standard-dose lidocaine iontophoresis (40 mA-min), and 2 sham treatments indirectly by measuring skin anesthesia.
Double-blind crossover study.
Research laboratory.
15 healthy volunteers (10 women, 5 men: age 24.06 ± 2 y, height 169.7 ± 8.3 cm, weight 72.5 ± 14.2 kg).
Four treatments were counterbalanced and applied on the anterior forearm: 2 true interventions (40 and 80 mA-min) and 2 sham interventions separated by at least 24 h. The true-intervention doses were applied at a current of 2 mA with 2.5 ml 2% lidocaine HCL for 20 and 40 min. The sham treatments were 2.5 ml of lidocaine without galvanic current (intensity = 0 mA, 40 min) and 2.5 ml of saline solution (galvanic current of 2 mA for 40 min).
Semmes-Weinstein monofilament scores were taken preintervention and postintervention (at 0, 20, 40, and 60 min) to measure skin anesthesia.
A significant interaction between treatment and time (F = 4.137, P < .01) was identified. The 40-mA-min dose produced greater anesthesia than the lidocaine and saline shams at all times. The 80-mA-min dose produced greater anesthesia than saline sham at all times. There was a significant difference noted, with 40 mA-min over 80 mA-min, at the 20-min posttest, but there were no other significant differences between the 40- and 80-mA-min doses at 0, 40, or 60 min posttreatment or between the 2 sham treatments at any time.
The 40-mA-min treatment was just as effective as the 80-mA-min treatment, suggesting that shorter treatments may be more time efficient for clinicians and patients.
电渗疗法是一种使用电流经皮给药的方法。剂量是电流幅度和治疗时间的产物。人们假设更高剂量的电渗疗法在输送药物方面更有效，但支持这一说法的研究还不够充分。
通过测量皮肤麻醉，比较高剂量利多卡因电渗疗法（80 mA-min）、标准剂量利多卡因电渗疗法（40 mA-min）和 2 种假治疗。
双盲交叉研究。
研究实验室。
15 名健康志愿者（10 名女性，5 名男性；年龄 24.06±2 岁，身高 169.7±8.3cm，体重 72.5±14.2kg）。
4 种治疗方法相互平衡，在前臂上应用：2 种真正的干预措施（40 和 80 mA-min）和 2 种假干预措施，间隔至少 24 小时。真干预的剂量以 2 mA 的电流应用 2.5 毫升 2%利多卡因 HCL 20 分钟和 40 分钟。假治疗分别为 2.5 毫升无电流的利多卡因（强度=0 mA，40 分钟）和 2.5 毫升生理盐水（电流强度为 2 mA，40 分钟）。
在干预前和干预后（0、20、40 和 60 分钟）测量皮肤麻醉情况，采用 Semmes-Weinstein 单丝评分。
治疗与时间之间存在显著的交互作用（F=4.137，P<.01）。40 mA-min 剂量在所有时间点都比利多卡因和盐水假治疗产生更大的麻醉效果。80 mA-min 剂量在所有时间点都比盐水假治疗产生更大的麻醉效果。在 20 分钟的测试后，40 mA-min 剂量与 80 mA-min 剂量之间存在显著差异，但在治疗后 0、40 或 60 分钟或在任何时间的 2 种假治疗之间，40 mA-min 与 80 mA-min 剂量之间没有其他显著差异。
40 mA-min 治疗与 80 mA-min 治疗同样有效，这表明较短的治疗时间可能对临床医生和患者更有效率。
Zotero 插件